Interactional behaviour of analgesic drugs in aqueous solution of caffeine at different temperatures using multi-technique approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug combination therapies have been a promising strategy to overcome drug resistance. However, unexpected drug–drug interaction may cause adverse reactions, which puts patients in danger. Keeping this in mind, the interactions between pain killers, paracetamol (PCM), and ibuprofen sodium with caffeine (CAF) have been studied. Apparent molar volumes ( V2,ϕ) and apparent molar isentropic compression ( Ks,2,ϕ) for analgesic drugs in aqueous (1, 2, 5, and 10 mmol·kg−1) CAF solutions have been determined from measured densities, ρ, and speeds of sound, u, respectively, at T = 288.15–318.15 K and at pressure p = 101.3 kPa. The results have also been interpreted in terms of various interactions occurring in the mixed solution. Calorimetrically determined negative values of ΔtrΔdil H0 indicate the exothermicity and thus the occurrence of energetically more favorable process. The hyperchromic shift (UV absorption) in the spectra of PCM in aqueous solution of CAF suggests the dominance of solute–cosolute interactions through the hydrophobic–hydrophobic/hydrophilic groups (1H NMR) of PCM + CAF system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".